Kerry's ill thought out joke - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

florida0214 · 11-01-2006, 06:18 AM

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't you get stuck in Iraq."

Now this comment, According to Kerry, was a jab at the president, however the president is not the one stuck in Iraq. Our American soldiers are. Now we know who is to blame for this, but that is not what was said.

If you look at this statement backwards you will see that the result of being uneducated and not making an effort to be smart will result in you getting stuck in Iraq. It is, by no means a stretch to see how so many tropps might get offended. He may have not meant it but he still said it. Maybe he should fire his speech writer or simply stop TRYING to make jokes. The president is mentioned nowhere in his "joke". This was a very stupid comment and his attempts to make an apology were pathetic.
Yes, her served. So what I Have served with anti-military individuals and anti-government individuals. Because you served, does not mean you love the troops and would never want to hurt them or their families.

Come on Kerry admit this was stupid comment and apologize to our troops.
Lets see how this gets defended. what do you all think?

shakran · 11-01-2006, 06:34 AM

it was a stupid comment because it's very easy for the right to spin it so that the more moronic among us can get angry at the democrats again.

You have to really watch what you say when you're up against the republicans, because their spin machine is second to none.

Ustwo · 11-01-2006, 06:46 AM

Lets just hope he runs in 2008

Charlatan · 11-01-2006, 06:48 AM

Should we really care what he has to say? I can't see him running for anything anytime soon.

Would be care if Walter Mondale or Gary Hart or Ross Perot had anything to say right now? OK maybe Perot... but that's just good comedy.

aberkok · 11-01-2006, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by florida0214

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't you get stuck in Iraq."

Now this comment, According to Kerry, was a jab at the president, however the president is not the one stuck in Iraq. Our American soldiers are. Now we know who is to blame for this, but that is not what was said.

If you look at this statement backwards you will see that the result of being uneducated and not making an effort to be smart will result in you getting stuck in Iraq. It is, by no means a stretch to see how so many tropps might get offended. He may have not meant it but he still said it. Maybe he should fire his speech writer or simply stop TRYING to make jokes. The president is mentioned nowhere in his "joke". This was a very stupid comment and his attempts to make an apology were pathetic.
Yes, her served. So what I Have served with anti-military individuals and anti-government individuals. Because you served, does not mean you love the troops and would never want to hurt them or their families.

Come on Kerry admit this was stupid comment and apologize to our troops.
Lets see how this gets defended. what do you all think?

No...you mis-interpreted the joke, I'm afraid. It is not a dis to the troops. More of a lament. All the joke means is that having to go to Iraq is not "doing well," and certainly isn't the desired result of hard study and decent education. Read it again.

The way to interpret this as an attack on the president (and I'm only explaining the plain English of it), is the same way we're used to: as a criticism of the fact that he declared war, and as a result, American soldiers now have to be there, sometimes dying, instead of at home making lives for themselves.

ratbastid · 11-01-2006, 07:05 AM

You know, I feel the same way about this that I did about that guy who resigned after using the word "niggardly". What he meant to say really is beside the point. He said something that was easy to misinterpret, and that's just not good politics. He should apologize for saying something that could be misconstrued as a hack on the troops, and use the opportunity to reiterate his support and empathy for the good and brave men and women who are stuck in Iraq as a result of this administration's yadda yadda yadda.

Kerry: don't get swiftboated again! RESPOND to this! Be a freaking statesman, for once!

pan6467 · 11-01-2006, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberkok

No...you mis-interpreted the joke, I'm afraid. It is not a dis to the troops. More of a lament. All the joke means is that having to go to Iraq is not "doing well," and certainly isn't the desired result of hard study and decent education. Read it again.

The way to interpret this as an attack on the president (and I'm only explaining the plain English of it), is the same way we're used to: as a criticism of the fact that he declared war, and as a result, American soldiers now have to be there, sometimes dying, instead of at home making lives for themselves.

I agree that was the meaning but it was lost in what he said. You can sit there and read it 1,000 times and know what he is saying, know that there is truth in what he is saying but the way it was said was truly tasteless and done without thought.

But he's human and .....well every single one of us says stupid things and makes mistakes that may have merit but were done or said in a way that made us look bad. I say stupid things on a daily basis (ask Lady Sage) the difference between me and Kerry is I don't have a microphone glued to my shoulder picking up and making public everything I say.....

aberkok · 11-01-2006, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

I agree that was the meaning but it was lost in what he said. You can sit there and read it 1,000 times and know what he is saying, know that there is truth in what he is saying but the way it was said was truly tasteless and done without thought. (But he's human and .....well every single one of us says stupid things and makes mistakes that may have merit but were done or said in a way that made us look bad.)

I just don't want it taken for granted that florida0214 has distilled the actual meaning, when he has decided on a wild mis-interpretation. I agree it was in poor taste. If I was an American soldier in Iraq, I'd probably be upset if I heard that comment as a reminder of my situation. Kerry certainly has a way with words - makes you want to sleep or cry.

Willravel · 11-01-2006, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George W. Bush, in response to the Kerry comment

"The members of the United States military are plenty smart and they are plenty brave and the senator from Massachusetts owes them an apology,"

Kerry isn't responsible for the Iraqi War. George W. Bush is responsible for every soldier in Iraq. He is responsible for them being in danger. He is responsible for them being mangled, and losing limbs. He is responsible for them losing their lives. John Kerry makes a comment, that's true, mind you, and Buhs jumps on him? Oh, hell no.

A message to George W. Bush: how dare you even think of demanding someone else apologize to the troops, when you yourself deficate on them each and every day? You are responsible for their injuries and deaths. You, not the man you cheated out of an election. You are a deeply insensitive, foolish, and cocky asshole. You should be deeply ashamed of yourself, and I lok forward to the day that you stand trial for war crimes.

NCB · 11-01-2006, 07:32 AM

Kerry's an inbred, elitist prick who has nothing but sneering contempt the unwashed masses who serve in the armed forces. It is a very common refrain among libs: Only the poor and the stupid serve.

That being said, he needs to be on camera 24/7. Given enough exposure he could single-handedly win the election for the GOP.

Kaliena · 11-01-2006, 07:34 AM

Is Kerry planning to run for anything anytime soon? I'm not asking to be snitty, I'm just curious.

NCB · 11-01-2006, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaliena

Is Kerry planning to run for anything anytime soon? I'm not asking to be snitty, I'm just curious.

Yes, he's talked about running for PRez again in 2008. One can only hope

pan6467 · 11-01-2006, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Kerry's an inbred, elitist prick who has nothing but sneering contempt the unwashed masses who serve in the armed forces. It is a very common refrain among libs: Only the poor and the stupid serve.

That being said, he needs to be on camera 24/7. Given enough exposure he could single-handedly win the election for the GOP.

And by making statements like these you are above what you accuse Kerry of being, How?

Willravel · 11-01-2006, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Kerry's an inbred, elitist prick who has nothing but sneering contempt the unwashed masses who serve in the armed forces. It is a very common refrain among libs: Only the poor and the stupid serve.

The military targets young members of low income households and those who don't graduate from high school. John Kerry isn't responsible for recruiting.

Kaliena · 11-01-2006, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

The military targets young members of low income households and those who don't graduate from high school. John Kerry isn't responsible for recruiting.

I thought at this point though the military was struggling to recruit anyone, no matter what their economic status?

Seaver · 11-01-2006, 08:07 AM

Quote:

You know, I feel the same way about this that I did about that guy who resigned after using the word "niggardly". What he meant to say really is beside the point. He said something that was easy to misinterpret, and that's just not good politics.

No, Niggardly could be easily understood by a dictionary. This was bad rhetoric which begged to be taken differently.

Quote:

The military targets young members of low income households and those who don't graduate from high school. John Kerry isn't responsible for recruiting.

Thank you for proving you know next to absolutely nothing about the military. If you don't graduate High School you will not even be looked at. The military targets anyone who finished his/her HS education, and is in good shape. Absolutely no where is it stated or implied that they target low income, if that were true minorities in the services would be extremely high proportionately. They are not, people of all social classes are recruted.

If what you are implying is true, there would not be a higher level of college educated personell in the Armed Forces as the rest of the US. If they are purposefully recruiting people who can't even finish HS, how the hell do we have so many in the military with PHD's and Doctorates?

And Kerry IS just as responsible, look at his voting record. He may not have initiated it, but being on the security council he had access to every secret report the President had.

dc_dux · 11-01-2006, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Thank you for proving you know next to absolutely nothing about the military. If you don't graduate High School you will not even be looked at. The military targets anyone who finished his/her HS education, and is in good shape

The military has recently lowered their recruitment standards to include lower aptitude standards (hs diploma still required), lower medical standards, persons with minor criminal records, known gang members...

About 17% of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems, including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight increase from last year, the Army said.

Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral" reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for medical reasons and 7% were drug and alcohol problems, including those who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...cruiting_x.htm

Quote:

Kerry IS just as responsible, look at his voting record.

I refer you to my link on voting records on the other Kerry thread.

Willravel · 11-01-2006, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

Thank you for proving you know next to absolutely nothing about the military. If you don't graduate High School you will not even be looked at. The military targets anyone who finished his/her HS education, and is in good shape. Absolutely no where is it stated or implied that they target low income, if that were true minorities in the services would be extremely high proportionately. They are not, people of all social classes are recruted.

Thank you for proving you know nothing about military recruiting. Absolutely everywhere in this country that is low income is flooded with military recruiters promising to pay for college. Maybe you can find some statistics to back up your claim that members of all income brackets are represented equally. My highschool was crawling with military recruiters. Did they just talk to seniors? Nope. They spoke to all age groups, usually minorities (Mexicans, in my school's case). That's standard. Rich kids don't usually join up. I wonder why.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

If what you are implying is true, there would not be a higher level of college educated personell in the Armed Forces as the rest of the US. If they are purposefully recruiting people who can't even finish HS, how the hell do we have so many in the military with PHD's and Doctorates?

This is what's wrong with TFP. People read what they want to read. I said: "The military targets young members of low income households and those who don't graduate from high school." Does that mean they ONLY target those people? Nope. That means that two groups of people they target are listed. How many of your PHDs and Docorates enter the military at the bottom, the people who will be on the ground, in Iaq, defending a caravan?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

And Kerry IS just as responsible, look at his voting record. He may not have initiated it, but being on the security council he had access to every secret report the President had.

Bush initiated it. He directed investications to find fault in Iraq. He insisted on a war, and information was withheld from the Senate. Yea, it's all Kerry's fault.

dc_dux · 11-01-2006, 08:35 AM

Quote:

people of all social classes are recruted.

Here is representation of Army recruits by income range (based on the average income of the zip code of the recruits).

http://nationalpriorities.org/index....179&Itemid=107
"Note that the peak of the bars falls in the range of $20,000 - $54,999. In other words, neighborhoods with low to middle median household incomes are represented or over-represented. Neighborhoods with high median household incomes are under-represented."

NCB · 11-01-2006, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

The military targets young members of low income households and those who don't graduate from high school.

Not true at all, for recruiters are a fixture at universities. What you probably mean is that the military is an attractive option to those who are poor and have a limited educational background.

Quote:

And by making statements like these you are above what you accuse Kerry of being, How?

As a former member of the military I take great offense to people who attempt to demoralize and ridicule those who serve. Simple as that

Ustwo · 11-01-2006, 08:44 AM

I expected you to feel that way about the military will. I'd be surprised if a majority in combat were college educated because of their ages, I know a great many former grunts who are now college educated professionals. Trying to defend Kerry on this is laughable. Hell even JFK got his college degree though the Navy.

I would like to thank Kerry though for this help right before the midterm election. Things were looking good before the Foley October surprise but maybe this little miscalculation will give a extra push in a few key races.

Willravel · 11-01-2006, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Not true at all, for recruiters are a fixture at universities. What you probably mean is that the military is an attractive option to those who are poor and have a limited educational background.

YOU MEAN THE MILITARY RECRUITERS AT MY HIGH SCHOOL WERE FAKE!~ Oh God, I better call the police. I better tell them about ROTC, too.

dc_dux · 11-01-2006, 08:45 AM

Quote:

What you probably mean is that the military is an attractive option to those who are poor and have a limited educational background.

NCB....I agree with you on this one, although I think recruiters at times have been shown to be overly aggressive bordering on resorting to dishonest persusasive techniques, particularly at high schools in low income areas.

Quote:

Things were looking good before the Foley October surprise(wtf ?????) but maybe this little miscalculation will give a extra push in a few key races.

dream about the impact of this latest repub created issue.

Ustwo · 11-01-2006, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Here is representation of Army recruits by income range (based on the average income of the zip code of the recruits).

http://nationalpriorities.org/index....179&Itemid=107
"Note that the peak of the bars falls in the range of $20,000 - $54,999. In other words, neighborhoods with low to middle median household incomes are represented or over-represented. Neighborhoods with high median household incomes are under-represented."

Meaningless without combat troop statistics.

Edit:I'll also add its the army, which is the least desirable of the armed services to join. Normal progression is Airforce-Navy-Army, with marines being a thing of their own.

NCB · 11-01-2006, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

YOU MEAN THE MILITARY RECRUITERS AT MY HIGH SCHOOL WERE FAKE!~ Oh God, I better call the police. I better tell them about ROTC, too.

You said that they target HS dropouts (who theoretically wouldnt really be at the HS or in a ROTC program to begin with) and those from low income homes. I pointed out that is not the case. Knucklehead

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

NCB....I agree with you on this one, although I think recruiters at times have been shown to be overly aggressive bordering on resorting to dishonest persusasive techniques, particularly at high schools in low income areas.

Youre right to an extent and would only correct you in that ALL recruiters tend to be unsavory, used car salemen types. My recruiter was an all out slimball

dc_dux · 11-01-2006, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

.....the army.... is the least desirable of the armed services to join.

If Kerry had said this, I wonder if the Repubs would have accused him of mocking or demeaning the army?

Ustwo · 11-01-2006, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

If Kerry had said this, I wonder if the Repubs would have accused him of mocking or demeaning the army?

Most likely, but far less of a fuck up than what he did say.

As a rule the army gave less pay and less benifits.

host · 11-01-2006, 09:18 AM

Do we even have to wonder why they "come for" Kerry now? This is just another chickenhawk, bullshit psy-op to take the focus away from where it rightfully belongs....we're supposed to be "at war", since 9/11/2001....and here is the "record" of your "able" CIC:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...123001326.html
Down on the Ranch, President Wages War on the Underbrush
Bush Conscripts Aides in Tireless Pursuit of Clearing Ground

By Lisa Rein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 31, 2005; Page A03

CRAWFORD, Tex., Dec. 30 -- On most of the 365 days he has enjoyed at his secluded ranch here, President Bush's idea of paradise is to hop in his white Ford pickup truck in jeans and work boots, drive to a stand of cedars, and whack the trees to the ground.

If the soil is moist enough, he will light a match and burn the wood. If it is parched, as it is across Texas now, the wood will sit in piles scattered over the 1,600-acre spread until it is safe for a ranch hand to torch -- or until the president can come home and do the honors himself.

[President Bush, shown clearing cedar at his Crawford, Tex., ranch in 2002, has not lost his enthusiasm for the task during recent trips to what aides call the Western White House.
President Bush, shown clearing cedar at his Crawford, Tex., ranch in 2002, has not lost his enthusiasm for the task during recent trips to what aides call the Western White House. (By Eric Draper -- White House)]

Sometimes this activity is the only official news to come out of what aides call the Western White House. <h3>For five straight days since Monday</h3>, when Bush retreated to the ranch for his Christmas sojourn, a spokesman has announced that the president, in between intelligence briefings, calls to advisers and bicycling, has spent much of his day clearing brush.....

....and this year....he works....prosecuting the GWOT, while some troops serve four tours in Iraq....when is he working? He's perprtually campaigning, never spends time at his desk, in Washington....and you believe Kerry is insulting the troops?

Quote:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/bus...278141637.html
Michael Gawenda in Washington
November 1, 2006
Page 1 of 2 | Single page

ANALYSIS

BY TURNING chaos in Iraq into an election platform, George Bush has criticised the Democrats for a lack of initiative on fighting the war and on their security and domestic policies.

With only a week to go before midterm congressional elections that will shape the last two years of his presidency, Bush is on the campaign trail doing what he loves best: talking to ordinary Americans. His stop at a small university in Statesboro, Georgia looked like an old-fashioned campaign rally - flags flying, placards bobbing up and down, Bush in an open-necked blue shirt with his sleeves rolled up, flaying the Democrats to thunderous applause.

That the crowd loved him is not surprising, given Bush rallies are stage-managed down to the smallest detail, and audience members are closely vetted by White House officials.

Bush's senior adviser and the Republican Party's chief strategist, Karl Rove, has told the party that to give Republicans the best chance of holding on to both houses of Congress they should paint the Democrats as weak on national security, as the party of "cut and run" on Iraq, and the party of gay marriage and other social evils.

"If you listen carefully for a Democrat plan for success in Iraq, they don't have one," Bush proclaimed to a standing ovation.

"Iraq is the central front in the war on terror, yet they don't have a plan for victory."

On gay marriage, Bush insisted that only Republicans would support traditional families from the "judges who want to legislate from the bench" - a reference to the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision last week that gay couples are entitled to to the same rights as heterosexual couples.

More rapturous applause.

But why is Bush campaigning in Republican strongholds such as Georgia and his home state of Texas rather than the states that will decide the election outcomes, such as Ohio and Missouri?

The White House strategists, Rove in particular, believe that the best - and maybe the only - chance the Republicans have of avoiding an election debacle next week is to convince the party's conservative "values" base that if the Democrats win control of Congress, the world will come to an end.

That explains why Bush and the Vice-President, Dick Cheney, seem to be doing an interview a day on White House-friendly Fox cable news, which is the media outlet of choice of Christian conservative Republicans.

But most Republicans in tough races do not want Bush campaigning for them. With his approval rating stuck below 40 per cent in most polls, he is a liability.

and the next day, yesterday, Bush flew right back to.....Georgia !

Quote:

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/...OL_US_Bush.php
Campaigning for Republicans in election's final days, Bush hits hard at gay marriage
The Associated Press

Published: October 30, 2006

STATESBORO, Georgia President George W. Bush has tried for months to define the Nov. 7 congressional elections as a choice about two issues: taxes and terrorism. Now, with polls predicting bleak results for Republicans, he is trying to fire up his party by decrying gay marriage......

.....On Tuesday, Bush is heading back to Georgia, a state he twice won comfortably. Tuesday's rally is aimed at helping another Republican former congressman, Mac Collins, oust Democratic Congressman Jim Marshall........

When Mr. Bush wasn't away from Washington...clearing brush....for 365 days out of five years.....or away campaigning.....he was addressing the troops, as he did last veterans day.....but he wasn't even straightforward, with them:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...111101832.html
Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument

By Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, November 12, 2005; Page A01

President Bush and his national security adviser have answered critics of the Iraq war in recent days with a two-pronged argument: that Congress saw the same intelligence the administration did before the war, and that independent commissions have determined that the administration did not misrepresent the intelligence.

Neither assertion is wholly accurate........

....Mr. Bush's military record:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Sep11.html
Gaps in Service Continue to Dog Bush

By Michael Dobbs
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 12, 2004; Page A08

President Bush's military records, including personal flight logs just released by the Pentagon, paint a picture of a solid, if hardly outstanding, pilot who energetically performed his duties for much of a six-year stint with the Air National Guard. Then, in the spring of 1972, the picture changes....

..... A review of the authenticated documentary record for Bush's guard service and interviews with former guard members suggest that the president and his aides have been less than fully candid about unexplained gaps in his military service, and have made misleading and sometimes inaccurate statements that have helped fuel the controversy.

At the same time, Bush's critics have been unable to come up with definitive evidence showing that he failed to meet his minimum obligations to the guard after being suspended from flying for failing to take the physical. .......

.....Whatever Bush's reasons for failing to take the physical, he seems to have put in minimal service at best in Alabama. According to his official personnel records, made public by the White House and the Pentagon, he failed to show for any drills between May and October 1972, even though Air Force regulations required him to attend 90 percent of scheduled drills, barring events "beyond his control."......

...The records contradict the claims of a former Alabama National Guard officer, John B. "Bill" Calhoun, who came forward earlier this year at the behest of "a Republican close to Bush" to testify to vivid memories of Bush taking part in drills during the period in question. No credible witness has come forward to say Bush was seen performing guard duties in Alabama, despite a $10,000 reward offered by "Doonesbury" cartoonist Garry Trudeau.....

Compare the deceitful "mess", above, to Mr. Kerry's record, and tell me that this media blitz is not a carefully coordinated republican effort to shift the focus from Mr. Bush's failed leadership and illegal disaster of an invasion and occupation of Iraq, from Mr. Bush....to Mr. Kerry:

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/wa...rtner=homepage
Kerry and G.O.P. Spar Over Iraq Remarks

Article Tools Sponsored By
By DAVID STOUT
Published: October 31, 2006

......Mr. Bush stepped up the language on Iraq on Monday while campaigning for Republican candidates in Georgia and Texas. “However they put it, the Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this,” he said. “The terrorists win and America loses.”

Part of Mr. Kerry’s outrage may arise from memories of 2004, when a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth raised allegations, never substantiated, that he had exaggerated his wartime exploits. Some political observers thought Mr. Kerry and his allies were too slow to strike back at his attackers.

This time, Mr. Kerry did not wait. “No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut-and-run policy in Afghanistan and a stand-still-and-lose strategy in Iraq,” he said in his statement. At his news conference, he accused Republicans of creating “straw men” because “they’re afraid to debate real men.”

John Kerry had no trouble verifying his own military service....from a credible fellow Naval officer who served alongside Kerry, in combat in Vietnam:

Quote:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...ck=1&cset=true
Swift boat skipper: Kerry critics wrong
Tribune editor breaks long silence on Kerry record; fought in disputed battle

By Tim Jones, Tribune national correspondent. Tribune staff reporter Rick Pearson contributed to this report from Crawford, Texas
Published August 22, 2004

The commander of a Navy swift boat who served alongside Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry during the Vietnam War stepped forward Saturday to dispute attacks challenging Kerry's integrity and war record.

William Rood, an editor on the Chicago Tribune's metropolitan desk, said he broke 35 years of silence about the Feb. 28, 1969, mission that resulted in Kerry's receiving a Silver Star because recent portrayals of Kerry's actions published in the best-selling book "Unfit for Command" are wrong and smear the reputations of veterans who served with Kerry.

Rood, who commanded one of three swift boats during that 1969 mission, said that Kerry came under rocket and automatic weapons fire from Viet Cong forces and that Kerry devised an aggressive attack strategy that was praised by their superiors.

He called allegations that Kerry's accomplishments were "overblown" untrue.....

Before you post a reply laced with republican talking points that demand a Kerry "apology to the troops".....consider that the folks who Kerry referred to are the "clay" molded by the Bush era neocons, into the enlistees who end up in the rank and file who serve, and die....in our military, in Iraq. Would many educated people "volunteer" to serve four tours as a combat E-4 in Iraq, if they weren't given a helping....or two....of tax funded psy-op?

They think that we're stupid fucks....that we'll believe everything that they tell us....enough of us, anyway.....and....they've been right....They know their constituency, and, how to reach them, how to turn them.....

Here is how they "do it":

Quote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6101178.stm
Tuesday, 31 October 2006, 10:38 GMT

Iraq violence 'linked to US vote'
Relatives embrace in front of coffin of US soldier Andrew Patton
Increasing numbers of Americans want troops to start coming home
US Vice-President Dick Cheney has said that insurgents in Iraq have increased their attacks in order to influence the upcoming US mid-term elections.

He blamed a recent rise in violence on al-Qaeda and others trying to "break the will of the American people".......

.........Propaganda unit

Pentagon spokesman Eric Ruff has echoed the vice-president, saying that the militants are trying to "increase opposition to the war and have an influence against the president".

Their comments come amid one of the worst months of violence since the war began, which has claimed the lives of 101 US troops and many more Iraqis.

The upturn in violence also coincided with the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which Mr Cheney said could have been a contributory factor.

Despite the violence, the BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says that the Bush administration does not believe the true picture of events in Iraq has been made public.

The White House is particularly concerned that insurgents are using the internet to disseminate their message and give the impression they are more powerful than the US, our correspondent says.

In response the US defence department has set up a new unit to better promote its message across 24-hour rolling news outlets, and particularly on the internet.

The Pentagon said the move would boost its ability to counter "inaccurate" news stories and exploit new media.

'Set the record straight'

Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said earlier this year the US was losing the propaganda war to its enemies.

The newly-established unit will use "new media" channels to push its message and "set the record straight", the Pentagon's Mr Ruff said.

"We're looking at being quicker to respond to breaking news, being quicker to respond, frankly, to inaccurate statements," he said.

A Pentagon memo seen by the Associated Press news agency said the new unit would "develop messages" for the 24-hour news cycle and aim to "correct the record".

The unit would reportedly monitor media such as web logs and would also employ "surrogates", or top politicians or lobbyists who could be interviewed on TV and radio shows.

Mr Ruff said the move to set up the unit had not been prompted either by the eroding public support in the US for the Iraq war or the US mid-term elections next week.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sinclair Lewis (1917)

Fascism will come to America wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.

Quote:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politic...ents/truth.pdf
(page 1)
Truth from These Podia
Summary of a Study of Strategic Influence, Perception Management,
Strategic Information Warfare and Strategic Psychological Operations
in Gulf II
Sam Gardiner1
Colonel, USAF (Retired)

October 8, 2003

1 The author has taught strategy and military operations at the National War College, Air
War College and Naval War College. He was recently a visiting scholar at the Swedish
Defence College. During Gulf II he was a regular on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer as
well as on BBC radio and television, and National Public Radio.
The study was not funded by any organization, and the author’s arguments are not meant
to represent those of any organization.
He can be reached at SamGard@aol.com

(page 3)
.....It was not bad intelligence. It was much more. It was an orchestrated effort. It
began before the war, was a major effort during the war and continues as post-conflict
distortions.
The title of this study was difficult for me. When I began I thought it was going
to be an analysis of Pentagon spin. I was going to call it, “Truth from this Podium.” That
was to be a play on promises we were given before the war. The more I did, the more it
became clear that it was not just the Pentagon. It was the White House, and it was
Number 10 Downing Street. It was more than spin.
I though about calling it “Apparatus of Lies,” connecting to a title the White
House gave a paper on Iraq’s decade of fabrication, mostly about weapons of destruction.
Although lies were part of the effort, that title would have been off the mark because the
story is more about aversion to truth rather than the open lie.
I also missed on the subject. I thought it was going to be about spinning the
stories of the conflict. I was wrong. The real essence of what I found was a much
broader problem. It is a problem about the future as much as the past. This problem
became the story of the study.
This is one way of summarizing the study:
2
The United States (and UK) conducted a strategic
influence campaign that:
• …distorted perceptions of the situation both
before and during the conflict.
• …caused misdirection of portions of the military
operation.
• …was irresponsible in parts.
• …might have been illegal in some ways.
• …cost big bucks.
• …will be even more serious in the future.
I know what I am suggesting is serious. I did not come to these conclusions
lightly. Because my plea is for truth in war, I have tried to be very careful not to fall into
a trap of describing exaggerations with exaggeration. I hope I’ve done that. I expect
some will believe I have been guilty of the same sins. As long as we can have some
discussion about truth in war, I accept the criticism.

(page 4)
Truth from These Podia
You will see in my analysis and comments that I do not accept the notion that the
first casualty of war is truth. I think we have to have a higher standard.
In the most basic sense, Washington and London did not trust the peoples of their
democracies to come to right decisions. Truth became a casualty. When truth is a
casualty, democracy receives collateral damage.
My plea is for truth. I believe we have to find ways to restore truth as currency of
government in matters as serious as war. My story would be important if it were the last
chapter of the book. It’s not. There is more to come. As the United States struggles with
a post-conflict Iraq, distortions continue. Probably of more concern, major players in the
game are working on ways to do it “better” in future conflicts.

In other words, it appears as if the issues of this war will become even more
important for future wars. We have reason to be concerned.
Another way to summarize the study:
Summary
• Clearly, the assumption of some in the government is the people
of the United States and the United Kingdom will come to a
wrong decision if they are the given truth.
• We probably have taken “Information Warfare” too far.
• We allowed strategic psychological operations to.
become part of public affairs.
• We failed to make adequate distinction between strategic
influence stuff and intelligence.
• Message became more important than performance.

3
The concepts of warfare got all mixed up in this war. I’ll come back to this
subject later, but what has happened is that information warfare, strategic influence,
strategic psychological operations pushed their way into the important process of
informing the peoples of our two democracies. The United States and the UK got too
good at the concepts they had been developing for future warfare.
The best way to describe my methodology is to use words that came from
Admiral Poindexter’s unfunded project, Total Information Awareness, later known as
Terrorism Information Awareness. What I have done is look for “inconsistencies in open
source data with regard to known facts…and goals.”.....

docbungle · 11-01-2006, 09:34 AM

I don't really understand what is so interesting about this. It's all they are talking about on the news, and here it is on the forum. How is it relevant?

It doesn't mean anything. It's not a real issue. It's a 4-second audio clip that may or may not have been misconstrued. But, you know, so what? Why do you care so much? This is just goofy.

pan6467 · 11-01-2006, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

As a rule the army gave less pay and less benifits.

Do you even check your facts or think before you post. You are so full of it, you truly show you have no idea what you are talking about.

The pay scale between branches has pretty much always been the same. an E-1 or E-9 in the Army makes exactly the same as an E-1 through E-9 in the Air Force or Navy or Marines. Same with Officer grades and Warrant officers.

Benefits are exactly the same also.

Quote:

FY 2006 Military base pay is based upon grade (rank) and years of service: Rank <2 2 3 4 6 8 10 12
E-9 4022.10 4113.30
E-8 3292.50 3438.30 3528.30
E-7 2288.70 2498.10 2593.80 2720.70 2819.40 2989.50 3084.90 3180.30
E-6 1979.70 2178.00 2274.30 2367.60 2465.10 2685.00 2770.50 2865.30
E-5 1814.10 1935.30 2028.60 2124.60 2273.70 2402.10 2496.60 2,526.60
E-4 1662.90 1748.10 1842.60 1935.90 2018.40 2018.40 2018.40 2018.40
E-3 1501.20 1595.70 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00
E-2 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40
E-1 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50
E-1 with less than 4 months of service 1178.10

Rank 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
E-9 4228.20 4363.50 4499.40 4717.80 4902.30 5097.00 5394.00
E-8 3636.30 3753.30 3964.50 4071.60 4253.70 4354.80 4603.50
E-7 3350.40 3435.60 3516.30 3565.80 3732.60 3840.60 4113.60
E-6 2948.70 2978.10 2998.50 2998.50 2998.50 2998.50 2998.50
E-5 2,526.60 2,526.60 2,526.60 2,526.60 2,526.60 2,526.600 2,526.60
E-4 2018.40 2018.40 2018.40 2018.40 2018.40 2018.40 2018.40
E-3 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00 1692.00
E-2 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40 1427.40
E-1 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50 1273.50

For the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, and the Sergeant Major of the Army and Marine Corps (the highest ranking enlisted positions of each service), basic pay is $6499.60.

Quote:

FY 2006 Military base pay is based upon grade (rank) and years of service:

Rank <2 2 3 4 6 8 10 12
W-5
W-4 3328.80 3581.10 3684.00 3785.10 3959.40 4131.30 4305.90 4475.70
W-3 3039.90 3166.80 3296.40 3339.30 3475.50 3631.50 3837.30 4040.40
W-2 2673.90 2826.60 2960.40 3057.30 3140.70 3369.60 3544.50 3674.40
W-1 2361.30 2554.50 2683.80 2767.50 2990.40 3124.80 3243.90 3376.80

Rank 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
W-5 5720.10 5916.30 6113.10 6311.10
W-4 4651.50 4927.20 5103.60 5276.10 5454.90 55631.00 5811.00
W-3 4256.40 4418.40 4579.80 4649.10 4720.80 4876.80 5032.50
W-2 3801.30 3888.30 3961.50 4100.70 4239.00 4379.10 4379.10
W-1 3465.00 3544.80 3674.70 3773.10 3773.10 3773.10 3659.70

Quote:

FY 2005 Military base pay is based upon grade (rank) and years of service: Rank <2 2 3 4 6 8 10 12
O-10
O-9
O-8 8271.00 8541.90 8721.60 8772.00 8996.10 9371.10 9458.10 9814.20
O-7 6872.70 7191.90 7339.80 7457.10 7669.80 7879.50 8122.50 8364.90
O-6 5094.00 5596.20 5963.40 5963.40 5985.90 6242.70 6276.60 6276.60
O-5 4246.50 4783.68 5115.00 5117.10 5383.50 5507.40 5779.20 5978.70
O-4 3663.90 4241.40 4524.30 4587.60 4850.10 5131.80 5482.20 5755.80
O-3 3221.40 3651.90 3941.70 4297.50 4503.00 4728.90 4875.30 5115.90
O-2 2783.10 3170.10 3651.00 3774.30 3852.00 3852.00 3852.00 3852.00
O-1 2416.20 2514.60 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60

Rank 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
O-10 12818.70 12818.70 12818.70 12818.70
O-9 11689.50 11857.50 12101.10 12525.60
O-8 9916.20 10222.80 10666.20 11075.40 11348.70 11348.70 11348.70
O-7 8607.90 9371.10 10015.80 10015.80 10015.80 10015.80 10066.50
O-6 6633.30 7263.90 7634.10 8004.00 8214.60 8427.60 8841.30
O-5 6236.10 6630.60 6818.10 7003.80 7214.40 7214.40 7214.40
O-4 5945.40 6054.30 6117.60 6117.60 6117.60 6117.60 6117.60
O-3 5240.70 5240.70 5240.70 5240.70 5240.70 5240.70 5240.70
O-2 3852.00 3852.00 3852.00 3852.00 3852.00 3852.00 3852.00
O-1 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60 3039.60

Commissioned officers with more than four years of active duty service as an enlisted member or a warrant officer are paid at a special rate, up until they reach the grade of O-3. The below chart shows the base pay for commissioned officers who have more than four years of active duty service as an enlisted member or a warrant officer:

Rank 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
O-3E 4297.50 4503.00 4728.90 4875.30 5115.90 5318.40 5434.50 5592.90 5592.90 5592.90 5592.90 5592.90
O-2E 3774.30 3852.00 3974.70 4181.40 4341.60 4460.70 4460.70 4460.70 4460.70 4460.70 4460.70 4460.70
O-1E 3039.60 3246.30 3366.00 3488.70 3609.30 3774.30 3774.30 3774.30 3774.30 3774.30 3774.30 3774.30

LINK: http://usmilitary.about.com/od/fy200.../06basepay.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by docbungle

I don't really understand what is so interesting about this. It's all they are talking about on the news, and here it is on the forum. How is it relevant?

It doesn't mean anything. It's not a real issue. It's a 4-second audio clip that may or may not have been misconstrued. But, you know, so what? Why do you care so much? This is just goofy.

Because it sells man. and it adds fuel to the partisanship hatreds. The GOP have to get their swipes in, then the Dems have to get theirs in and before you know it everyone is fighting and spewing hatred and arguing over how something was said and not about what was said.

It takes the heat off the press as being "too liberal"

and takes the heat off the real issues and maybe in some people's minds gets some of those "on the wall" indecisive types to vote GOP now.

Willravel · 11-01-2006, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

You said that they target HS dropouts (who theoretically wouldnt really be at the HS or in a ROTC program to begin with) and those from low income homes. I pointed out that is not the case. Knucklehead

Nyuck Nyuck....

Let's say that you're the poor son of a Mexican immigrint. Yoyu have to struggle for everything. You're poor as poor can be. You can't meet bills. You do well in school, but school time takes away from your time to work. A military officer chats you up at school and mentions that the military has benifits, big old payouts and such. You jump at the chance. You drop out. So, you're both a drop out, AND you were rectuited at school!! How is that even possible!>?

dc_dux · 11-01-2006, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Youre right to an extent and would only correct you in that ALL recruiters tend to be unsavory, used car salemen types. My recruiter was an all out slimball

I think it is entirely apprpropriate for recruiters to go to highs schools and explain to 18 yr kids who are uncertain about their future that the military is a respectable and honorable option, either in the short term as a means to other opportunities or a long-term career.

But these recruiters should be honest and forthright, with no illusions and false expectations. It is not appropriate or honorable to act like "unsavory, used car salesmen types" trying to meet a quota.

CMH · 11-01-2006, 11:18 AM

Good God. Lots of very polarized individuals here. The best is when people like Host or Pan6467 post all that crap like they expect everyone to read it word for word.

Stop apologizing for Kerry. There was no botched joke. Just a cheap shot on troops, and it was cheap because he knew it would make the audience feel smug about themselves. If you ask me, a lot of people owe an apology to the troops, and the country. Kerry might as well start it off.

This is not coming from a Republican...

filtherton · 11-01-2006, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMH

Good God. Lots of very polarized individuals here. The best is when people like Host or Pan6467 post all that crap like they expect everyone to read it word for word.

Yeah, i mean, gosh, who reads things on the internet?

dc_dux · 11-01-2006, 11:28 AM

CMH........Thanks for your non-polarizing contribution. The fact that you are not a Repub must mean you are a close Kerry advisor to know of his intent with such certainty and clarity.

jorgelito · 11-01-2006, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Nyuck Nyuck....

Let's say that you're the poor son of a Mexican immigrint. Yoyu have to struggle for everything. You're poor as poor can be. You can't meet bills. You do well in school, but school time takes away from your time to work. A military officer chats you up at school and mentions that the military has benifits, big old payouts and such. You jump at the chance. You drop out. So, you're both a drop out, AND you were rectuited at school!! How is that even possible!>?

I was heavily recruited in high school (I was in a special program for "bad kids") AND I dropped out. These things happen.......

I was also recruited at the community college many years later.

And then again at my college (but this time, they were looking for officers).

To be fair, the high school recruiter may have been looking for officers to ROTC etc, but skipped over my group (for obvious reasons).

aceventura3 · 11-01-2006, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by florida0214

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't you get stuck in Iraq."

Now this comment, According to Kerry, was a jab at the president, however the president is not the one stuck in Iraq. Our American soldiers are. Now we know who is to blame for this, but that is not what was said.

If you look at this statement backwards you will see that the result of being uneducated and not making an effort to be smart will result in you getting stuck in Iraq. It is, by no means a stretch to see how so many tropps might get offended. He may have not meant it but he still said it. Maybe he should fire his speech writer or simply stop TRYING to make jokes. The president is mentioned nowhere in his "joke". This was a very stupid comment and his attempts to make an apology were pathetic.
Yes, her served. So what I Have served with anti-military individuals and anti-government individuals. Because you served, does not mean you love the troops and would never want to hurt them or their families.

Come on Kerry admit this was stupid comment and apologize to our troops.
Lets see how this gets defended. what do you all think?

I listened to how he defended his statment. He piled on the BS pretty thick.

Kerry statement shows his true colors. He is an elitist snob lost in 1960's time warp.

Halx · 11-01-2006, 11:54 AM

I think if people stopped picking apart words and actually focused on actions, the word "politics" would hardly have meaning. That is a good thing. Unfortunately, we have to make a big deal and piss our pants when someone says something dumb. As if we're fooling ourselves that an individuals words do in fact speak louder than his actions. I'm sorry people, but the fact that people have to debate this topic in the first place is really disheartening.

He fucked up. It was dumb. We can all agree. Who cares what it "means." Look for his voting record and his policies in office to determine if he's a schmuck or not.

Ustwo · 11-01-2006, 11:58 AM

hiredgun · 11-01-2006, 12:00 PM

I agree with Halx... this should really a non-story.

How can you possibly interpret his comments as anti-military? Have you forgotten that he himself served? Do you think he's really stupid enough to basically come out and say: "I think the troops are dumb and uneducated!"? Bush took us to Iraq and Bush is now politically stuck there, and that's what Kerry meant.

His wording was poor. No one ever accused Kerry of being too charismatic. But.. so what? What does this really tell us about anything?

11-01-2006, 06:18 AM	#1 (permalink)
florida0214 Crazy Location: South Florida	Kerry's ill thought out joke "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't you get stuck in Iraq." Now this comment, According to Kerry, was a jab at the president, however the president is not the one stuck in Iraq. Our American soldiers are. Now we know who is to blame for this, but that is not what was said. If you look at this statement backwards you will see that the result of being uneducated and not making an effort to be smart will result in you getting stuck in Iraq. It is, by no means a stretch to see how so many tropps might get offended. He may have not meant it but he still said it. Maybe he should fire his speech writer or simply stop TRYING to make jokes. The president is mentioned nowhere in his "joke". This was a very stupid comment and his attempts to make an apology were pathetic. Yes, her served. So what I Have served with anti-military individuals and anti-government individuals. Because you served, does not mean you love the troops and would never want to hurt them or their families. Come on Kerry admit this was stupid comment and apologize to our troops. Lets see how this gets defended. what do you all think? __________________ "Two men: one thinks he can. One thinks he cannot. They are Both Right."

11-01-2006, 06:46 AM	#3 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Lets just hope he runs in 2008 __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

11-01-2006, 06:48 AM	#4 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Should we really care what he has to say? I can't see him running for anything anytime soon. Would be care if Walter Mondale or Gary Hart or Ross Perot had anything to say right now? OK maybe Perot... but that's just good comedy. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

11-01-2006, 07:34 AM	#11 (permalink)
Kaliena Crazy Location: Pennsylvania, USA	Is Kerry planning to run for anything anytime soon? I'm not asking to be snitty, I'm just curious. __________________ ~Beware the waffle~

11-01-2006, 08:44 AM	#21 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	I expected you to feel that way about the military will. I'd be surprised if a majority in combat were college educated because of their ages, I know a great many former grunts who are now college educated professionals. Trying to defend Kerry on this is laughable. Hell even JFK got his college degree though the Navy. I would like to thank Kerry though for this help right before the midterm election. Things were looking good before the Foley October surprise but maybe this little miscalculation will give a extra push in a few key races. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

11-01-2006, 06:34 AM	#2 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	it was a stupid comment because it's very easy for the right to spin it so that the more moronic among us can get angry at the democrats again. You have to really watch what you say when you're up against the republicans, because their spin machine is second to none.

11-01-2006, 07:05 AM	#6 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	You know, I feel the same way about this that I did about that guy who resigned after using the word "niggardly". What he meant to say really is beside the point. He said something that was easy to misinterpret, and that's just not good politics. He should apologize for saying something that could be misconstrued as a hack on the troops, and use the opportunity to reiterate his support and empathy for the good and brave men and women who are stuck in Iraq as a result of this administration's yadda yadda yadda. Kerry: don't get swiftboated again! RESPOND to this! Be a freaking statesman, for once!

11-01-2006, 09:34 AM	#29 (permalink)
docbungle It's all downhill from here Location: Denver	I don't really understand what is so interesting about this. It's all they are talking about on the news, and here it is on the forum. How is it relevant? It doesn't mean anything. It's not a real issue. It's a 4-second audio clip that may or may not have been misconstrued. But, you know, so what? Why do you care so much? This is just goofy. __________________ Bad Luck City

11-01-2006, 11:18 AM	#33 (permalink)
CMH Upright	Good God. Lots of very polarized individuals here. The best is when people like Host or Pan6467 post all that crap like they expect everyone to read it word for word. Stop apologizing for Kerry. There was no botched joke. Just a cheap shot on troops, and it was cheap because he knew it would make the audience feel smug about themselves. If you ask me, a lot of people owe an apology to the troops, and the country. Kerry might as well start it off. This is not coming from a Republican...

11-01-2006, 11:28 AM	#35 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	CMH........Thanks for your non-polarizing contribution. The fact that you are not a Repub must mean you are a close Kerry advisor to know of his intent with such certainty and clarity. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 11-01-2006 at 11:35 AM..

11-01-2006, 11:54 AM	#38 (permalink)
Halx Please touch this. Owner/Admin Location: Manhattan	I think if people stopped picking apart words and actually focused on actions, the word "politics" would hardly have meaning. That is a good thing. Unfortunately, we have to make a big deal and piss our pants when someone says something dumb. As if we're fooling ourselves that an individuals words do in fact speak louder than his actions. I'm sorry people, but the fact that people have to debate this topic in the first place is really disheartening. He fucked up. It was dumb. We can all agree. Who cares what it "means." Look for his voting record and his policies in office to determine if he's a schmuck or not. __________________ You have found this post informative. -The Administrator [Don't Feed The Animals]

11-01-2006, 11:58 AM	#39 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	__________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

11-01-2006, 12:00 PM	#40 (permalink)
hiredgun Addict	I agree with Halx... this should really a non-story. How can you possibly interpret his comments as anti-military? Have you forgotten that he himself served? Do you think he's really stupid enough to basically come out and say: "I think the troops are dumb and uneducated!"? Bush took us to Iraq and Bush is now politically stuck there, and that's what Kerry meant. His wording was poor. No one ever accused Kerry of being too charismatic. But.. so what? What does this really tell us about anything?